Â鶹ÒùÔº

In a recent study, Dr. Claudine Abegg and her colleagues analyzed the remains of a mummified cranium housed in the collections of the Museum of Cantonal Archaeology and History of Lausanne.

The study, in the International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, conducted a provenance analysis, as well as a taphonomic and anthropological assessment to reveal the origin of the remains and possible life history of individual I Y-001.

Over the past decade, many museums worldwide have undertaken the task of re-examining the human remains found in their older collections in an effort to contextualize the remains, give back their rightful histories and envision their future preservation.

I Y-001 was one such individual, donated to the museum by Louis Kuffré. Kuffré emigrated to Peru before eventually moving to Chile. In 1876, Kuffré sent a skull, along with two dozen other archaeological artifacts, to the museum of his hometown in Lausanne.

The label which was attached to the skull indicated some of its supposed provenance: "No. 10—Skull of an Inca from Bolivia from the canton of Ayjach, province of Amasujos, found in an Indian ruin in the plain of the Cordilleras at the foot of Mount Illimani at 12,900 feet of altitude—According to the tradition of the present Indians, this skull would be that of a tribal chief."

A reexamination of the skull and label, however, provided further insights. The "ruine indienne" referred to in the note most likely referred to a "chullpa," a type of burial tower used by the Aymara people.

These structures were a customary part of the funerary tradition around Lake Titicaca, today located in the province of Los Andes, which historically contained the canton Ayjach (Aigachi) from which the skull was supposedly taken. Additionally, chullpas were usually reserved for members of higher social standing, though not necessarily only chiefs.

Further investigation of the skull revealed three peculiarities, namely, the skull, which belonged to an adult man, had been artificially elongated. This practice was typically used to indicate group identity and was not associated with the Inca.

Interestingly, the practice also helps in establishing a relative dating of the skull. As no radiocarbon dating was conducted, due to the inherent destructiveness of the procedure, and the lack of archaeological context, it would, in theory, be impossible to provide a timeframe in which this individual lived.

However, while we know skull binding was practiced by the Aymara, we also know from historical data that the practice was officially banned by Viceroy Francisco de Toledo between 1572 and 1575. The last known documented case was in the mid-17th century, thus making the skull at least 350 years old.

Additionally, the man had undergone an attempted, but never completed, trepanation. The attempt did not kill the individual, as signs of healing indicate he lived some time after the attempted procedure.

Dr. Abegg notes that it is not possible to say why the trepanation was never completed, stating there could have been any number of reasons. "There are just too many parameters: the skill of the person performing the trepanation, the pain endured, the initial reason for undertaking the procedure … "

The final peculiarity identified on I Y-001 was a tooth abscess. The study proposes this may be due to poor oral hygiene, a common reason for such a malady to arise. The other possibility is that individual I Y-001 was a chewer of coca leaf, which, when done in excess, can lead to the formation of abscesses and loss of teeth.

Why Y-001's remains were sent to Switzerland may also be hinted at when given historical context. According to a letter to the Geographical Society of La Paz in the 1890s, Adolph Bandelier writes of the region of Patacamaya (approximately 80 km southeast of Aigachi).

He mentions the ease and abundance of acquiring human skulls in the 1800s. Additionally, he mentions, "My friend Putnam has promised to entrust this work to an anthropologist of the highest rank, Dr. F. Boas, currently in Northwest Asia. His absence is also the reason for the delay in the publication of my monograph on the (Titicaca) islands. Boas promised to add a study on the skulls we sent from there, about one hundred and fifty in total, including some fifteen trepanned ones."

The letter suggests the skulls were often looted, by local and foreign actors alike, for research purposes.

The case of individual I Y-001 exemplifies the complex ethical and methodological challenges facing modern museums as they grapple with historical collections of human remains.

As Dr. Abegg herself acknowledges, navigating these issues requires confronting multiple layers of complexity. "I think one of the challenges when discussing human remains that arrived in Western European museum collections from other parts of the world is the way laws are set up in different countries—each has their own process, legal bases, procedures, etc. about what can be repatriated and under what circumstances. This is for legal experts and political entities to discuss … "

" … It requires that one set aside their own perspective on death and the 'right' treatment of human remains, which is a matter of ethics and changes from person to person, from culture to culture. My perspective on what is 'respectful' towards human remains might be totally different from that of another culture / other epoch.

"As a result, considering how to ethically manage these remains requires that I balance my own (Western, European, atheist) perspective with the potential perspective of others who do not share my perspective. While it is easy to say, objectively considering one's own biases on any given subject and bypassing them is not easy on a daily basis."

© 2025 Science X Network